If technology is mirroring us, then what does that say about us? Are we deliberately turning ourselves into machines? Are machines turning into us? An old question, I know, but one that's not been satisfactorily answered in my view, and one worth asking again, specifically in this context of Vjing.

Roker's piece, and even some dictionaries (see definitions below), for the most part define interactivity as having to do exclusively with technology. Do people interact with each other? Do VJs interact with spectators?

VJs specifically, interact not just with spectators but with DJs - sound primarily affecting visual (though in some of my work recently I've been exploring the idea of reversing this (by default) hierarchy) and visual primarily affecting spectator; can the spectator's response to sound in turn affect visuals and vice-versa, making the spectator, the non-wired, purely receptive human, a conduit for the audio and visual signals to reach each other transformed, and in turn transforming the wired, active "player"- acting as go-between in the relationship between sound and vision, and in turn synthesizing the two within him/herself (synaesthesia)? Here I would tend to say "of course", but on the whole, as far as spectator affecting VJ, my own observation is that VJs are usually intently focusing on their own computer and/or the projection screen(s) to determine whether the image jibes with the sound they are hearing- or maybe not even that, in the extreme cases of ego self-involvement, but the question arises for me nonetheless of whether, if we lift our heads up to watch the audience (vidience?) watching our work, whether there is another dimension of observation and intuitive reaction we can tap into that can be explored through this medium. Just a thought...

INTERACTIVE:
1.acting one upon or with the other
2.of or pertaining to a two-way system of electronic communications, as by means of television or computer: interactive communications between families using two-way cable television.
3.(of a computer program or system) interacting with a human user, often in a conversational way, to obtain data or commands and to give immediate results or updated information: For many years airline reservations have been handled by interactive computer systems.

American Psychological Association (APA):
interactive. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Retrieved September 12, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interactive
Chicago Manual Style (CMS): interactive. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interactive (accessed: September 12, 2007).
Modern Language Association (MLA): "interactive." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 12 Sep. 2007.

INTERACTIVITY:
the extent to which something is interactive; the extent to which a computer program and a human being may have a dialog

American Psychological Association (APA):
interactivity. (n.d.). Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Retrieved September 12, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interactivity

Chicago Manual Style (CMS): interactivity. Dictionary.com. Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interactivity (accessed: September 12, 2007).
Modern Language Association (MLA): "interactivity." Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. 12 Sep. 2007.

INTERACTION:
1.reciprocal action, effect, or influence.

American Psychological Association (APA):
interaction. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Retrieved September 12, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interaction
Chicago Manual Style (CMS):
interaction. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/interaction (accessed: September 12, 2007).
Modern Language Association (MLA):
"interaction." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 12 Sep. 2007.

Interactive Manifesto

Here is a "manifesto" from 1996, so it's old and been around a while.

I'm offering it for consideration as an example of participatory work and self-criticism as a work of interactivity. (It's also a little bit fun...)

What is interesting about participatory works is that they seem to offer a great lattitude in what can be done, as with interactive works, but ultimately they for their users to work within some very tightly defined parameters, much like the blanks in the manifesto--there are only limited options actually available, creating a work that is ultimately subservient to the creator's designs, whatever those designs entail. The reset button is the ultimate invitation to self-liquidation that interactivity demands in an uncritical fashion. Is this manifesto then critical? Not necessarily.